About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBC 11
MSNBCW 11
CSPAN2 1
KGO (ABC) 1
WJLA (ABC) 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 28
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)
, your thoughts on this. i mean, isn't this harry reid's fault? harry had a chance to change the rules of the senate and he was too nice to mitch mcconnell and now look what we've got. there's probably more to come. your thoughts. >> i suppose so, though i remember not very long ago when we were all suffering under the george w. bush administration and there was a real fear that without the filibuster then george bush would have been able to put some of his very radical extremists on the bench and push through more of his agenda. so i understand the reticence to kind of unleash the nuclear option. and you know, i don't think you can necessarily blame harry reid for the unprecedented not just obstructionism but kind of paranoid lunacy of this new crop of senators who, you know, before i think we used to see this sort of incredibly paranoid mccarthyite apocalyptic view of american foreign policy among some of the characters in the house -- >> doesn't that make the case for why harry should have done, this because of the ted cruzes of the world and the tea parties of the world? they're tr
debate, then we might not be having this debate right now. the deal harry reid cut with mitch mcconnell is coming back to bite them. they could have gone for a lot more. they backed off. they shook hands again and went with something milder and then boom, he gets clowned two mornts later. >> nia malika, i want to be real clear. the filibuster has been around for decades. but its use has exploded in this past few years. in fact, two of the three sessions of congress with the worst filibuster abuse have happened under president obama. so let me just cut to the chase. is the gop's obstruction about policy? or is it just something personal about president obama. >> well, it's probably a little bit of both. it's about policy. it's about this president whose policies they vehemently disagreed with. harry reid had a chance to go for a more full-throated filibuster. but his reasoning was that when the democrats are in the majority -- in the minority and that could happen, this next election, that they want to have that same leverage that republicans have been using with this filibuster r
, harry reid, and said this is the solution. >> all right. meanwhile, senator lindsay graham is suggesting one potential -- >> i'm sorry, could i interrupt? i had a munchkin in my mouth. >> no, you can't have those. you're supposed to have your greek yogurt. >> i'm trying to make a point with a visual aid. this is like defense spending. done. gone. >> before the day has even started, you've just -- give those to me. >> i'm not homer simpson. what do you make of what woodward said? >> the president's in charge. he's got to figure out a way to stop the sequester. i think the symbolism of the last couple weeks haven't been great. he's not really out there leading a new path towards figuring out how to avoid something he says is a bad idea and promised as a candidate wouldn't happen. >> okay. john, joe's mouth is full. what do you think? >> i'm hap think the sequester be a bad thing. >> everyone says that. who's going to take the blame? who should? >> if it ends up going into effect, i think they're all going to take a lot of blame and they should. it's fair enough to say, if bob's reporting i
for the republicans and harry reid. >> they did not filibuster them. >> that sets a dangerous precede precedent. >> by the way, alex, i blame harry reid and the democrats, too. we had a chance at the beginning of the congress. we had a chance to make real filibuster reform and we took a pass. >> okay. you make a good point there. let's listen to john mccain talking about immigration. here it is. >> the president, obviously has some thoughts about immigration reform which he drafted and guided his agencies to comment on. if the president proposes legislation, do you think it will fail? >> of course. of course it will. that is why we are working together, republicans and democrats, by the way he had no communications with the congress. i believe we are making progress in a bipartisan basis. >> does this sound like republicans saying no for any of the president's proposals? >> no. >> no. >> my problem with president obama is alex, he does not negotiate with republicans. he doesn't bring the leadership up to talk to him. he doesn't make phone calls. >> does he do that with democrats? >> that is tru
, it starts in the senate and we'll see what harry reid can get done. most of the key players, nra ratings including the majority leader, chairman leahy, six democrats up in states that the president got 42% or less in. i don't think they'll be too enamored with him, so i think that pushes you toward things like background checks and the house, it's going to be tougher. i mean that's just the reality of it politically. so i would expect something to be done. i think there's going to be a lot of hearings but probably more in the mental health area, potentially in some of the background check areas, but anything that hints towards national regs won't make it and anything that really materially makes it more difficult for people to exercise second amendment rights won't happen. >> i tell you, i don't agree. i hope that -- i think the odds of something happening are determined by the determination of people who push those things. and when the folks are going to be joining me and jim langevin, we don't want to take the rights of owning a gun away. i own a gun myself, but i do believe when you h
they lose the election. they're in the minority in the senate, and they are dictating. harry reid, let's talk than filibuster again, dude. this is just another hostage situation for the republicans. they can hurt the poor and the working class in this country, the sequester, no doubt about it, unless the president gives them exactly what they want. >> if you want to look at ways to find $1.2 trillion in savings over the next decade, let's look at obama care. let's don't destroy the military and just cut blindly across the board. >> sure. let's forget about the 30, maybe 40 million people who are going to get health insurance in this country because of obama care. see, these republicans, my friends, are living in a fantasy world. the president and senate democrats once again have offered a plan with cuts in new revenue. but the gop is ready to deny history. you see, they're saying that spending doesn't stimulate the economy, and that they basically are sticking to that argument. house speaker john boehner continues to say spending? what's the big problem? it's amazing john boehner can i
to lead harry reid. look, we've tried 60 ways to sundown and, you know, i don't know what they got going on over at the senate, but i wish they would get together with the president, pass what they think they can pass, and then we would be glad to take a look at it. we've certainly shown -- >> you know as well as i do they're not going to be able to pass anything with 60 votes. they may be able to pass some things with 50, 52, 53 votes. they won't be able to pass anything with 60 votes, and should that be the marker on something like this? is this such an important -- >> for sure. >> -- thing it should take 60? that 41 -- >> no. i'm saying what should be the marker is the senate ought to be able to pass something. look, for better or for worse, the president -- >> so senate republicans need to get involved in this? >> no, what i'm saying is they need to work it out over there. i'm not going to tell the senate how to do their business, but they -- where br they start looking for us to lead them we've passesed two bills. the president passes nothing. the president's party controls the sena
out on this question, i agree with senator harry reid. when it came to the nomination of john bold, and in a of members of this body asked for additional disclosures from john bolton, and those disclosures were not forthcoming. harry reid said the following, the administration stonewalling has no one had the effect of slowing down the confirmation process, it has also put a further cloud over this individual and perhaps unnecessarily, raised the impression that the nominee and the white house have something to hide. i don't know if mr. hagel has received funds directly or indirectly from foreign sources, from extreme sources, but his refusal to provide disclosure i think is highly troubling. and i would suggest every member of this committee and every member of this body should stand together and at least insisting on adequate disclosure. i'll make one final point. some have asked, would you make the same request of a republican nominee? i'll point out you can chuck hagel is a republican. i don't know him personally, unlike many members of this committee. isa limit was record, and
haven't seen a solution from the president or harry reid. the republicans have put our plan on the table and passed it through the house of representatives. now it is incumbent upon the president to show leadership. >> let's turn to hagel. the nomination of course something taken up once the break is over. this is bob woodward on fox news talking about democratic senators calling the white house asking if hagel was going to withdraw. this is what he said was the white house response. >> the answer is an emphatic no. remember john urlicman used to talk about twisting slowly in the wind. >> why wouldn't the white house jump to hagel's defense? >> i think they have. had john mccain out this weekend. the expectation is that senator hagel is going to -- that vote is going to happen and he will be our next secretary of defense. what i think is deplorable and john mccain was very honest this weekend and part of what prompted some of democrat's questions. republicans made it clear this is a grudge match. lindsey graham is saying he is not going to vote on this or won't move on this until he find
proposed it to harry reid and off it went. in the end all the fingerprints of washington are on this deal in the end. you're saying in fact our navy is too pau small, you want a bigger one, buy bigger, cheaper, faster ships. this is a wake up call for the defense department. how do they learn from this. ralph? >> well, i hope they feel some real pain. i don't want our troops to feel pain. i don't want any honest federal worker to be furniture load. but my god, bill, the waste in the defense budget is enormous, and there is no lemon law when contractors sell us junk. generals and admirals don't say boo about weapons that don't work because they get out and go to work for the defense industry for lucrative salaries, and congress, again, they'll vote to preserve 20 bad jobs in their home district even if it cost us 20 troops. you're absolutely right, everybody's fingerprint is on it and my line to the republican is if sequestration is so bad, why do you guys vote for it? why do you have the guts to stand up back then? i say a playing on bot plague on both their houses stphao. bill: the milit
harry reid, eric cantor there. and members of congress. these are coveted seats. just saying before the president was introduced here, there has been all this advanced notice that the president will be sort of keeping with his confident, even arguably aggressive tone that he has taken since his reelection. the quote that stood out for me from politico this week, it was assigned to a person close to the drafting of the speech. >> right. >> said the president's approach to the republican party in this speech would be borrowed from the 2500-year-old chinese book philosophy "the art of war." and the quote was "build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across." . >> i like the quote. and i think that would be probably a good strategy for the president. i mean, i would hope that we don't see a lot of partisan bickering, but i hope he is aggressive in terms of the proposals that he is going to lay out. this being his last term, most people say 18 months and then you start looking lame duck. so very important speech as to what his presidency and his legacy is going to mean. and i think
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)